Return to Transcripts main page

Legal View with Ashleigh Banfield

Clinton to Address Journalists; Look at the Presidential Race; Trump vs. Clinton. Aired 12-12:30p ET

Aired August 05, 2016 - 12:00   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

[12:00:23] CHRISTINE ROMANS, CNN ANCHOR: Hello, everyone, I'm Christine Romans, in today for Ashleigh Banfield. Welcome to LEGAL VIEW.

Ninety-five days before Americans elect the next president. The Democratic nominee is in Washington for a joint convention of the National Association of Black Journalists and the National Association of Hispanic Journalists. No, it's not a press conference. A lot of journalists want a press conference, but that's not what this is. Hillary Clinton wrapping up the first week of the general election campaign on a high note. Actually several high since this time yesterday two more nationwide polls have shown the Democratic ticket with a sizable post-convention bounce. NBC and "The Wall Street Journal" now put Clinton up by nine points, nine points over Donald Trump among registered voters. And look at this new McClatchy-Marist poll. A Clinton-Kaine leads Trump-Pence by 15.

Meantime, a candidate aiming to build on her predecessor's legacy has to like these numbers. Employers added 255,000 net ne new jobs last month. That's well above economists' estimates. The unemployment rate held steady from June at 4.9 percent and people came off the sidelines, looked for jobs. We'll listen in when Clinton begins her remarks. In the meantime, I want to bring in my colleague, Suzanne Malveaux, she is there.

You know, Suzanne, you moderated this event with Mrs. Clinton back in 2007. Tim us about the format and what we're likely to hear today.

SUZANNE MALVEAUX, CNN NATIONAL CORRESPONDENT: Well, sure. I mean there's about 1,400 journalists who have gathered here to represent these organizations and the one thing that we do know, Christine, is she is going to tout those jobs numbers. It's something that she's going to talk about in an address to this group for about ten minutes or so. She'll be introduced. And then the moderators, two moderators, will be on stage with her, Kristen Welker of NBC, a good friend of mine, as well as Lori Montenegro of Telemundo, will each have one question to pose to her and then it will be opened up to a panel that's sitting in the front row. It's not a lot of time, actually, Christine, to get those questions to her when the whole thing is about 30 minutes or so. And there's been a lot of really kind of pushback here to get more access to Hillary Clinton -

ROMANS: Yes. MALVEAUX: To answer those tough questions. We expect that she will get some tough questions. The last go-around she was asked about her ban on same-sex marriage back in 2007. She was also pushed in something which was considered socialized medicine, a program of hers at the time. And so we do expect that there will be some pretty tough questions from the group.

ROMANS: You know, you're very right to point out that journalists are not always Clinton's favorite people, no question. But as demographics go, she could hardly be on friendlier turf here, Suzanne. That McClatchy poll, to pick just one, shows Clinton backed by 93 percent of African-Americans, among Latinos she's up 55-26 over Trump. So, tell me, this is a friendly audience. Was Trump also invited?

MALVEAUX: Oh, Trump was invited. He did not respond. He did not accept the invitation. He declined it. And I have to say, Christine, we've been covering these for many years here. We saw Bob Dole here. George W. Bush spoke at this convention as well. So this is a bipartisan event. This is something that people go and back in 2007, Hillary Clinton was 20 points above Barack Obama pretty consistently and during that time and so she did not necessarily even need to address the organization, but she's not taking anything for granted. She didn't back then, and she's certainly not taking anything for granted now. And it does help her. It is helpful to be before this audience. It's not only main stream media, but it's also niche media. It is media that is aimed at getting at those critical groups, African- Americans, Latinos, to make sure that they go out there and vote. And so this is a smart move, a political move on her part, and also telling that it is going to be brief. It is not going to be an all-out press conference or something that we - we would rather see her participate in, but she's getting her name, her face out there. And this has been a pretty good two weeks for her and she's really capitalizing off of that.

ROMANS: And a jobs report today that certainly is wind behind the sails. So we'll come back to you. We'll listen to her, dip into that when she begins to speak. Thank you so much, Suzanne Malveaux.

So let's broaden this discussion now with CNN's Phil Mattingly, CNN Money correspondent Cristina Alesci, and from "The Washington Post," political reporter Philip Bump.

I want to start with you, Cristina, because today Donald Trump's team, on the very morning that this strong jobs report comes out, unveiled sort of his list of economic big brains who are going to be helping power Donald Trump's economic policy. Who are these guys? And they are all guys.

CRISTINA ALESCI, CNN MONEY CORRESPONDENT: They are all guys and they're all white guys, but we'll get to that in a second. But putting that aside for a second, this is an odd group because they have no - many of them, I should say, have no policy experience. And that was by design according to a person that I spoke to that was close to the campaign, saying Trump really wanted to bring outsiders in that have these free market principles, and he wants to apply those to the government. It's not clear how that translates in terms of how, you know, free market economics works when you're dealing with the government but these are -

[12:05:16] ROMANS: But these aren't tycoons. These are hedge fund managers. These are tycoons.

ALESCI: Yes. So the other thing here that's really important to point out, these guys have done some controversial deals, right? So if I'm the Hillary Clinton campaign, I'm thinking, these guys profited during the financial crisis. They profited when many other average Americans were really suffering. If you look at that list, you'll see the John Hawken (ph), case in point, famously bet against the housing market at its peak and made billions in profits. Tom Barrack (ph), another investor who profited from the financial crisis.

And what's ironic here and what we were talking about, Christine, is the fact that these guys may not do so well under a Trump administration because he's been so anti-business on the campaign trail. And I asked Tom Barrack specifically about why he's supporting him when he could potentially hurt his business. Take a listen.

(BEGIN VIDEO CLIP)

TOM BARRACK, TRUMP DONOR, ECONOMIC ADVISER: What makes him so interesting to me is, as big a personality as he is, his heart really sits in the shoes of the average guy. And that's not rhetoric. It really is. I mean, I know him personally. I'm telling you, that's really where his - his heart sits.

(END VIDEO CLIP)

ALESCI: So, ironically, this crew of people around him who are close personal friends of Trump, by the way, and has done business with him throughout the years, actually think of themselves as the outsiders, as the guys who were the average guy, had a small business -

ROMANS: Interesting.

ALESCI: And were able to build it. And I know for a fact that's the way Barrack feels. And I know how that - that's how Steve Feinberg feels, who is the president and CEO of Cerberus Capital, who's famously recluse -

ROMANS: Interesting.

ALESCI: But he feels like an average guy. And he made headlines, if you remember, Christine, I know you were on this story, when he had to sell his interest in a firearm maker after Sandy Hook. And, you know, this is a hedge fund guy.

ROMANS: Right.

ALESCI: Profitable deal. But still sold his stakes.

ROMANS: All right, Cristina, interesting. We'll follow all those folks.

Meanwhile, Trump, today, Phil Mattingly, in stumping in Wisconsin. No shortage of big name Republicans in Wisconsin.

PHIL MATTINGLY, CNN CORRESPONDENT: Right.

ROMANS: But they won't be at the Trump event, will they?

MATTINGLY: Yes, Wisconsin's become like the cradle of top Republican officials. Reince Priebus is from Wisconsin. House Speaker Paul Ryan, from Wisconsin. Senator Ron Johnson, who's an endangered but very important Republican senator, is from there. And Governor Scott Walker, considered one of the rising stars, one of the top governors in the Republican Party. None of them will be joining Donald Trump and Mike Pence in Green Bay. And all of them are busy or have meetings or, in Paul Ryan's case and Ron Johnson's case, are running for re- election. Most notably in Paul Ryan's case, he's got a primary coming up.

ROMANS: Right.

MATTINGLY: Next week. A primary that Donald Trump has not endorsed him in and it's caused major problems behind the scenes. Reince Priebus is very close to Paul Ryan. Reince Priebus publically has just done everything possible to help Donald Trump over the course of these last couple of months, really trying to unify the Republican Party. Reince Priebus got stabbed in the back by Donald Trump, when Donald Trump decided not to endorse Paul Ryan. Now, Paul Ryan has come out and kind of waffled a little bit on his endorsement of Donald Trump but hasn't backed off it entirely.

Here's what's notable. Wisconsin is a very important state to Republicans, not just to Paul Ryan and Ron Johnson, but to Donald Trump as well. Donald Trump got whipped in the primary by Ted Cruz in Wisconsin. They need to turn Wisconsin red. Wisconsin Republicans do not like Donald Trump right now and what's happening tonight in Green Bay, where all these Republicans aren't showing up, doesn't help that process.

ROMANS: Interesting. And, Philip Bump, we're looking at all these polls. Run me through these polls because I feel like if you're on team Clinton, you really want to see these polls like in two months -

PHILIP BUMP, POLITICAL REPORTER, "WASHINGTON POST": Right. Right.

ROMANS: You know, with such a big, wide margin. Walk me through what your takeaway is and what we're seeing in these numbers.

BUMP: Right. No, you're exactly right, that this is timed because the Democratic Convention wrapped up last week. It's clear -

ROMANS: This is the bounce.

BUMP: Exactly. This is definitely a part of the convention bounce. It's a big bounce, right, and we're seeing polls across the board, both national and state polls that show Clinton with a lead. There was a poll out this morning from the "Atlanta Journal Constitution" that showed Clinton up four in Georgia. Georgia hasn't voted for a Democrat actually since Bill Clinton back in 1992. But it's been a very Republican state, as has most of the south. Clinton leads there, in part because she's leading so much nationally.

You're right, they would rather have this happen in late October, the last few weeks of October. They'll take it now, of course, in part because what we've seen over the course of this week is, Republicans are getting spooked. They're getting nervous about Donald Trump, if he's viable as a candidate. There are these rumblings, however real the rumblings might be, about him having to get off the ticket and them figuring out how they can replace him, which isn't going to happen.

ROMANS: That's so farfetched.

BUMP: Of course. But the fact that they're talking about it is something that is a bad sign because it sends this message to Republicans who might be on the fence, to these Wisconsinites who, yes, were a bulwark of the never Trump movement in the primaries. It sends a message that it is OK to distance yourself from Donald Trump. We saw in 1996, Republicans saw that Bob Dole was going to lose his election. They were able to cut cords for people who were running for Congress and for Senate. That's the risk that Donald Trump runs right now is that his party will just give up on him. It's very early. There's a lot of time left. But if these polls continue over the longer term, that's a risk that he runs.

[12:10:08] ROMANS: Yes, it is early and there's a lot of ways this storyline can shift.

BUMP: Sure.

ROMANS: And Monday he's going to lay out his economic plan in Detroit, and so there will be a lot to talk about how he's actually, Cristina, going to try to make jobs - make jobs great - make the job market great again, I guess.

Cristina Alesci, Philip Bump and Phil Mattingly, nice to see you all. Have a great weekend, guys.

The positive new job numbers out today, only part of the economic story. Up next, how Trump and Clinton see the economy so differently. And what can we expect in Trump's soon to be revealed economic policy? That's just ahead.

We're also waiting and watching for Hillary Clinton to speak to those reporters at the conference in Washington. We'll go right there as soon as she's ready.

(COMMERCIAL BREAK)

ROMANS: New jobs numbers showing some promising signs for American workers, just 95 days until the election, but the strong stats don't seem to gel with Donald Trump's view of the world. Here are the numbers, 255,000 net new jobs added in July, a second month of strong gains. The unemployment rate stayed at 4.9 percent. More than 1.3 million new jobs added this year. The unemployment rate actually could have gone down if not for the new people coming into the labor market, people coming off the sidelines trying to find a job. That's a good thing.

[12:15:02] The Trump camp, though, adding their own rebuttal, arguing that the economy is stuck in a deep hole and it's Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama's fault. Here's a statement from his team. Quote, "the media and the Clinton machine is describing an economy that doesn't exist for most Americans. It's an economy enjoyed he her donors and special interests and one suffered through every day by millions of Americans."

I want to discuss with a Trump policy advisor and business professor at the University of California Irvine, Peter Navarro. Also with us is Laura Tyson. She severed in the Clinton administration at the president's national economic advisor. She is now a professor of business administration and economics at the University of California in Berkley. This is my California crew today. Lunchtime out east, early morning there.

PETER NAVARRO, TRUMP POLICY ADVISER: Yes.

ROMANS: Peter, let me start with you here. I mean these numbers today, 255,000 net new jobs, a 4.9 percent unemployment rate, you can broaden it out and you can look at the auto industry, you can look at home prices back above pre-crash levels. You can look in general at, you know, signs of wealth in the stock market. Why build a wall and put up tariffs if you've got numbers like this in the economy?

NAVARRO: Well, let's dig a little deeper in today's jobs report. Labor participation rate, if you go look at the bureau of Labor Statistics' chart on this, you'll see beginning when Obama took office, kind of this longs, slow, ski slope down from about 67 percent to around what it is today, 62 or 63 percent. It hasn't budged. And that's a proxy for the tens of millions of Americans who are long-term unemployed, can't find a good job at a decent wage. And the other thing about that reports was the goods producing jobs, virtually non-existent, which jives with the ISM manufacturing index numbers -

ROMANS: Right.

NAVARRO: Which shows that the manufacturing sector is weak. And on top of that, Christine, the mean the - really the big news today for me was a widening unexpectedly of the trade deficit. And the Donald Trump campaign really sees the trade deficit as the fulcrum around which this economy can recover. The Trump trade doctrine is straight forward. He's not going to enter into any trade deals -

ROMANS: Right.

NAVARRO: Unless it increases the gross domestic product growth rate, decreases the trade deficit and strengthens the manufacturing basis. And so Hillary Clinton, you take her, a 2012 South Korean free trade equipment. It's the quintessential Clinton deal, right? She promised us 70,000 new jobs. We wind up with an over doubling of the South Korean trade deficit and we lose 75,000 jobs. Bill does the same thing with the WTO in China in 2001.

ROMANS: So trade - NAVARRO: Over the last 15 years -

ROMANS: So trade is going to be really the theme song here then?

NAVARRO: He's lost 70,000 (ph) factories (ph).

ROMANS: This is - these -

NAVARRO: Trade is the theme. The Trump trade doctrine.

ROMANS: This is going to - this is going to be the - the Trump -

NAVARRO: If we just -

ROMANS: The theme song for the next - the next three months.

I want Laura to kind of jump in, if you don't mind, Peter -

NAVARRO: If - if we fix - if we fixed the trade problem - and we're free traders. Make no mistake about that, Christine. Ronald Reagan slapped 100 percent tariffs on Japanese semi-conductors in the 1980s and Japan cheated. Trump will slap tariffs on any country that cheats us. But what he really wants is fair trade deals. Basically, again, the Trump trade doctrine, allow our GDP growth rate to grow, push our trade deficit down, strengthen our manufacturing base.

ROMANS: So, Laura, but the view from the other side, of course, is that you start slapping tariffs on - and the current administration and prior administration have tried the use current trade laws to go after the bad actors and there are, you know, I don't know how many - how many complaints we have right now that we're working through in the international course. But how does the Hillary Clinton team combat that? What has been resonating? It has been resonating. The trade theme song has been resonating.

LAURA TYSON, FMR. CHAIR, NATIONAL ECONOMIC COUNCIL IN CLINTON ADMIN.: The trade - the trade theme song has been resonating and senator - Hillary Clinton has said very clearly that her position on trade, looking at trade negotiation and trade agreements going, is really, do they add to jobs in the United States? Do they add to wages in the United States? And are they in the interests of the U.S. national security? So she's been very clear on this.

These numbers today and the issue about employment, they're not - I think we spend too much time on the trade issue here. First of all, from a pure macroeconomic point of view, it is the case that when you have a really strong U.S. economy relative to its trading partners around the world, you are going to see the trade deficit move from month-to-month. This was not a surprise. It's not about trade agreements. It's - in this case it's about the strength of the U.S. economy versus the strength of its trading partners.

But I really want to emphasize here not trade. I want to talk about investment because one of the key things here is we've had a strong jobs report, but we need to focus on investment in the future. We need to focus on infrastructure, on R&D, on advanced manufacturing. Those are the issues about future employment, future wage growth.

The other thing I want to say about today's jobs numbers is that there actually is increasing signs that wage growth is picking up. Now, we have to keep moving forward. And a strong investment agenda for America and for American workers is the way to do it. So I think the focus should be on investment. And I also think it should be on the fact that we have a very - we have a non-partisan excellent consulting firm, Mark Zandi, who's basically saying that if he looks at what we know about the Clinton economic plan, which is well laid out and described, we know it will add over the course of her term 10 million new jobs.

[12:20:27] ROMANS: Right.

TYSON: We know the analysis of Trump's plan, based on what he's put out, costs the economy 3 million - 3 million plus jobs. So I would say what's - what's about growth, what's about -

NAVARRO: (INAUDIBLE) -- Christine -

ROMANS: It's two - I was going to say, it's two -

(CROSS TALK)

ROMANS: It's two very different worlds. Peter, wait. Peter, I'm going to let you go in a second. I'm going to let you talk in a second. But I will tell you where there's the overlap, the infrastructure piece. Both candidates want a big infrastructure spend, with difference in size and how to pay for it exactly. But, Peter, tell me about the infrastructure part of this. Your candidate says he wants to do a bigger than Hillary Clinton's infrastructure deal. He wants to right away do it. He wants to be building roads and bridges and the like and he wants to issue bonds to do it. Is that a good idea?

NAVARRO: Sure. But I'm not going to let the Clinton spin machine really on Hillary's (INAUDIBLE) go here. Mark Zandi is a major Democratic donor and he is a Democratic donor (INAUDIBLE) Hillary Clinton -

ROMANS: He has advised - he has advised Republicans for president.

TYSON: Mark Zandi is a (INAUDIBLE) - he's advised (ph) partisan consulting firm.

NAVARRO: He is not - there's no - no, no, no, no, you're not going to pull that stuff on CNN. He had a brief honeymoon with one Republican candidate years ago and your White House keeps spinning that. It's a bunch of garbage the people of America are not buying.

Now, let's talk a little bit about -

TYSON: So do you not - so (INAUDIBLE) - so, Mr. Navarro, do you actually questioning Mark Zandi's consulting firm macroeconomics -

NAVARRO: Let's - let's talk - no, no, no, no, no. No, no, no, no. Yes, I do. Yes, I know Mark. Look, look - TYSON: You think they're - you think they're purely - it's unbelievable. I mean Mark Zandi (INAUDIBLE) -

ROMANS: You two were very nice to each other in the break. I will say, you guys were very nice to each other in the break.

NAVARRO: Yes. But let's - let's do this. Let's talk about infrastructure now, because what the Clinton folks don't understand is the relationship between investment, business investment, and trade. For example, Mexico, right now, because of the bad trade deal that Hillary and Bill signed in 1993 with NAFTA, we're seeing General Motors and Ford do most of their new production investment south of the border. We run a net trade deficit with Mexico and autos alone are $52 billion a year. And so if we want to get domestic investment here -

ROMANS: But tell me something, if you were to - but with the globalized supply chain, if you -

NAVARRO: Is this Christine?

ROMANS: Yes, yes, it's me.

NAVARRO: Well, who's (INAUDIBLE)?

TYSON: It's not Laura. It's not Laura.

ROMANS: No, no, no, it's me. I'm sorry. I wanted to ask you, though, but if you - if you were to put up some tariffs against, for example, Ford, an American company, for doing business in Mexico, wouldn't you hurt American jobs by disrupting the supply chain for the parts that are made here, too?

NAVARRO: Sure - sure - sure - that's a great question. So let's hand it a couple of ways. First of all, the problem - one of the problems with Mexico is the differential tax treatment under the World Trade Organization. Basically, Mexico can rebate (ph) is back (ph) tax. We can't rebate (ph) our income taxes. So that's a huge thing. You don't handle that with tariffs. You handle that with a renegotiation of the tax part of the WTO.

The second thing is, Donald Trump doesn't want to slap tariffs on anybody. Ronald Reagan didn't want to slap tariffs on anybody. But if they cheat us, he will do that. It's a negotiating tool. And you have to understand, the philosophy of the Donald Trump campaign and administration is to cut smart and good deals for the American people. And Hillary Clinton hasn't done that. You've got NAFTA, WTO and South Korean Free Trade Agreement as the three worst trade deals in American history. And she can spin all she wants about wanting good trade deals. But the fact of the matter, she has a history. Every time she's - we've negotiate one -

TYSON: Christine -

NAVARRO: It's been a bad trade deal. The other thing that Laura said, which blew me away was like - like -

no, wait - no, wait, the - one last thing though. One last thing here. One - one -

ROMANS: Last word -

TYSON: I think - I - can I - can I - listen, the time is going by and this is an attack on the past. This is -

NAVARRO: One last thing, Laura. You said that this trade deficit basically comes and goes.

TYSON: This is not about the future. You have -

ROMANS: Last point, Peter, and then, Laura, rebut.

TYSON: Well -

NAVARRO: One quick - well, look, you said the trade deficit comes and goes and fluctuates. The fact of the matter is, we have a $365 billion deficit with China that just keeps rising -

ROMANS: What -

NAVARRO: And our trade deficit is close to $800 billion a year.

ROMANS: OK. Laura -

NAVARRO: That isn't going away until we deal with our trade deals.

ROMANS: Laura, button it up for me.

NAVARRO: You have to tell the Clinton folks they need a smart one (ph).

ROMANS: So, Peter - so rather than sort of talk about the past and about Peter's -

NAVARRO: But the past is everything. The past is our future now. And that's the problem.

ROMANS: Peter's attack - no, no, what you've - see, I can't - I can't talk, Peter's not letting me talk. So, Christine, if you would like me to talk, I need to have the floor.

NAVARRO: Have at it. I won't say another word.

ROMANS: And I need to - and I need to rap. I'm against the wall, so, please (INAUDIBLE).

TYSON: Of course. You need to rap up. So this - so all I would say is, let us focus on how we continue the momentum of the U.S. economy, which has been gaining momentum. We have been generating stronger job growth and strong wage growth for American workers. We need to look to the future. [12:25:08] The future is about innovation. It's about investment. It's

about smart manufacturing. It's about clean alternative energy. It's about giving American workers child care and leave policies so that American men and women can take on the jobs of the future.

ROMANS: Right.

TYSON: It is not about a critique of trade policies made under President Clinton in the early - in the mid to late 1990s. It is not about that. This is about the future. And Hillary has been extremely clear on her position on trade.

ROMANS: OK.

TYSON: Trade agreements need to be looked at. Trade negotiation need to be looked at in terms of, do they create jobs for Americans? Do they raise the wages of Americans? And are they in U.S. national security interests.

ROMANS: Laura Tyson -

TYSON: That is her trade agenda.

ROMANS: Laura Tyson, Peter Navarro, a spirited discussion. Come back. We can argue about it again. You were very nice to each other in the commercial break, so I know you must really be friends.

Thank you.

TYSON: Thank you.

ROMANS: Bye-bye.

NAVARRO: (INAUDIBLE).

ROMANS: I know, I can tell. It's only politic, folks. And we expect to hear from Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton taking questions from reporters at a conference in Washington. We're going to bring you that when she speaks. There's the stage there.